a) Is Minister or his office a ‘public authority’ under the RTI Act? b) Whether a citizen has right to information sought, and does the minister has corresponding obligation to give?
Commissioner of Customs Vs S.S. Offshore Pvt. Ltd. (Bombay High Court) A right of an appeal has to be bestowed by a statute and no person can claim it as of a right, de hors the statute. However having found that there is a right of appeal conferred from the orders of the Commissioner of […]
The recent judgment of the Trial Court in the matter of 2G scam denotes yet another failure of the conscience and consciousness of the nation because it did not invoke enough strong protest from the general public. Political expediency should not be allowed to sabotage and suppress the truth and allow the perpetrators of a crime to go unpunished.
D. Pauls Travel & Tours Ltd. Vs. Union Of India & Anr. (Delhi High Court) The petitioner submits that it is in the business of booking tours and hotel packages for customers. They charge IGST from customers for bookings in hotels located outside Delhi. However, they are unable to avail input tax credit on the […]
The Madras High Court, while quashing an assessment passed under Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act (TNVAT), ruled that Assessing Officer, being an Independent Authority, cannot be compelled to follow the direction of the enforcement authority and the court quashed the assessment.
It is also an admitted fact that no such condition has been imposed in the notification, dated 20.12.1975 that the registered dealers engaged in sale of the above said goods, have to produce ‘C’/’D’ Forms for claiming concessional rate of tax.
M/S Ramdev Trading Company And Another Vs. State Of U.P. (Allahabad High Court) Penalty and seizure is not sustainable for movement of goods without Transit Declaration Form (TDF) unless there exists malafide intention to evade taxes. In absence of any allegation or evasion of tax being made against the petitioner at the stage of detention […]
The petitioner the consignor of certain goods has approached this Court against the notice issued by the detaining authority under the CGST/SGST Act. After detention when verification was made, it was found that there was mis-classification as also under valuation.
It was argued that govt does not have any jurisdiction to enter into an inquiry in respect of the subject matter of the notice and as such the impugned notice was wholly without jurisdiction.
M/s. Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd. Vs. State of Maharashtra (Bombay High Court) It is evident that in the facts of the present case the contract was clearly one for supply and erection of equipment, supply of equipment being dominant purpose. No doubt the State of Maharashtra had enacted the Maharashtra Sales Tax on “Transfer” of […]
